Comment | Review | Books | Film

Creating Generational Dependency

Intended Consequences #1

If there was ever a topic that requires endless comment but generates ceaseless ridicule and denial, it is the ‘Plantation Politics’ of people who claim to have the best interests of others in their hearts when, in fact, the opposite is true.

Too often, I hear the excuses for adult male abandonment of their obligations to their families laid at the door of past intentional separation caused by the economic condition of enslavement. The argument goes like this: “Families were separated and members sold, hence the lack of social commitment to fatherly responsibilities.”

Do any of the people who say this realize how insulting and racist they are to assume that because families, in some cases, were deprived of cohesion over 150 years ago, that an adult male is still incapable of forming a lasting bond with his offspring?

That argument falls apart when the facts are presented. Until the ‘War on Poverty’ effort of the 1960s, only 25% of children in ethnic minority families were born out of wedlock. By this year, 2016, that percentage has reached 70-75% and, in some areas, as high as 90-95%.

The only reason this is the case is entirely due to the provisions of the ‘War on Poverty’ itself. Adult males could not be in the household if the family otherwise qualified for economic assistance. The adult male was extraneous to need, ostracized from the family and considered unimportant to the health, well-being and stability of his spouse and their offspring.

Some men were able to continue in their role as father, but overtime, they were pushed farther and farther away, in order for the mother and children to get the assistance the Government provided – thus keeping the family dependent on and subservient to the good will of the new Plantation Owner – Uncle Sam.

Without the influence and security of a permanent adult male in the household, the inevitable decay of family life and values was assured. Mothers and their children had no alternative to welfare, leading inevitably to a lack of self-assurance and a sense of betrayal.

Those families able to escape the Intentional Consequences of the Government’s creation of multi-generational dependence/re-enslavement of this community, did so at the cost of ridicule and accusations of “doing the Massa’s bidding”. Those who capitulated to the will of the Government Masters by accepting the conditions imposed by the provision of assistance, signed contracts of bondage for many generations to come.

So far, the contract of bondage imposed by the ‘War on Poverty’ has claimed the offspring of recipients for over five decades. The result has been despair, anger and erroneous placement of blame.

The perpetrators of this bondage continue to claim that only they care enough to offer assistance although the assistance means perpetual poverty, failing education, substandard housing, rotting neighborhoods, gang violence, and the mental, emotional and physical impoverishment of just over 12% of American citizens.